View Full Version : Now that it's ended.
Archive
10-27-2007, 07:45 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>I'm not very familiar with these regardless, I say fake. What say you?<br /><br /><a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=260172973884&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=016" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=260172973884&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=016</a>
Archive
10-27-2007, 07:48 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Fake as they come. The back is not a legit TSN back, first and foremost.
Archive
10-27-2007, 08:02 PM
Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>Reprint.......gap between the photo and the thin black line around the photo, too wide.
Archive
10-27-2007, 08:46 PM
Posted By: <b>Tim Newcomb</b><p>This seller even claimed it was original-- this is sad-- everybody loses on this one.........<br /><br />When will people learn to spot that gap between the picture and the surrounding box??????
Archive
10-27-2007, 09:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>But this seller honors returns if the card is destroyed!<br /><br />"I HONOR RETURNS ONLY IF IT IS SHOWN THAT THE ITEM DOES NOT MATCH THE DESCRIPTION, OR IF THE ITEM IS DESTROYED IN TRANSIT".<br />
Archive
10-27-2007, 09:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>As I look at it again, I see where it is an m101-5. M101-5s do not exist with a Sporting News back.
Archive
10-27-2007, 09:43 PM
Posted By: <b>anthony</b><p>technically it is an original card...an original reprint. he never claims it to be from 1916
Archive
10-27-2007, 10:53 PM
Posted By: <b>DaveL</b><p>or does it look like he had a shill in there early on to goose the price up?